NeverarGreat

What type of radical changes?

Thanks! This is my first attempt at any sort of color correction, so I'm mainly wondering if what I did is at all similar to what others have done with this type of correction.

For the record, the settings used were:

Image Control:

Brightness -8

Contrast 120

Hue 0

Saturation 100

Gamma Correction:

8

Channel Mixer:

Red-Red 100

Red-Green 10

Red-Blue -2

Red Const 0

Green Red -7

Green-Green 100

Green-Blue 10

Green Const 0

Blue-red -20

Blue-Green 16

Blue-Blue 100

Blue Const 0

Truncated Video Link: https://vimeo.com/73254016

Password: starwars

For latest version screenshots and settings, see page 3. Original post follows:

I used two screenshots from the Legacy project to guide the correction, and began with the final shot of the film. The Legacy screenshot had very different luminosity as well as color, so I corrected the DVD luminosity to match, and then used the channel mixer in Premiere Elements 3 to correct the color as much as possible (I know, old software etc). Using the luminosity correction resulted in blown out highlights for much of the film, so I abandoned most of these and used luminosity and gamma correction that I thought was appropriate for the entire film.

JEDIT: (See Photobucket for old screenshots)

You can see some more before and after screenshots (cropped slightly, I don’t know why) on Photobucket:

http://s649.photobucket.com/user/NeverarGreat/library/Star%20Wars%20Color%20Correction?sort=3&page=1

Folder is Star Wars Color Correction, password starwars.

As you can see, the image was very blue and dark before the correction. I’d say that the medal ceremony shot is about halfway to the Legacy version. I didn’t know how to correct it further without totally yellowing the entire image.I wanted just a fix that could be applied to the entire film, and not get bogged down in the scene by scene details. This is the special edition, after all, so I’m mainly concerned with a blanket correction to get it looking halfway respectable.

If anyone wants more info on what particular settings were used, or to offer suggestions, I’d like to hear them!

JJ is a safe choice. Arndt is a safe choice. I'm guessing that the movie will be "safe". Meaning that I won't care at all. Say what you will about the prequels, at least they took you places. Just not places you wanted to be.

Ah, who am I kidding?

I'll get very excited to see this movie, and then I'll see this in the theater along with the rest of the known world, and then I'll almost instantly embark on the joyous act of criticizing every single aspect of it that was either true to the originals, and thus boring, or new and different, and thus blasphemy. I'll then tell you all about it on this website, and continue work on my own ideas about the Prequels and Sequels. Most people will hail the new trilogy as a worthy conclusion to the saga, however, and Disney will make bank.

It's almost sad how predictable we all are.

StarThoughts said:

It's interesting that the journey from the Hoth system to Bespin was brought up, because I noticed that as being a glaring error for the first time when I watched the film this weekend.

The only in-story justification I can imagine is that the Imperial fleet was spread out among the local star systems looking for the Falcon, and that the Avenger made a hyperspace jump to the Anoat system to rendezvous with the Executor and the rest of the fleet for Captain Needa's apology, inadvertently taking the Falcon with her. Now that I think about it, this is supported by the dialogue as Leia asks Han where they are.

 

It's reasonable to assume that this part of the film elapses quite a bit of time, both because of Luke's training and because of how entrenched Vader is at Cloud City when the Falcon arrives, but to imagine that they somehow travelled from one star system to another at sublight speeds is a bit difficult to swallow, even in the fast-and-loose physics of Star Wars.

The idea that the Executor would travel to a different star system seems silly, after it is discussed that hyperdrive would allow the Falcon to escape to anywhere in the galaxy. The only reason to continue the pursuit with their ships is if they believe that the Falcon didn't have hyperdrive, and thus couldn't travel to other star systems. Vader even says that he wants every ship available to sweep the asteroid field, and hires bounty hunters to help.

Another problem with the fleet traveling to hyperspace with the Falcon in tow is that Han says that they could float away IF the fleet follows protocol and dumps their garbage. If their goal was to evade the fleet, they could have detached from the Avenger at the first garbage dump and saved themselves the trouble of evading multiple ships. Then again, they would need to be in an inhabited system to make repairs, so perhaps they jumped with the Destroyer and then detached nearer to their destination. However, this is never implied, and indeed he orders the Avenger to continue to scan the area while he is away apologizing to Vader, which heavily implies that the Avenger doesn't travel with him.

Eh, probably just a problem with the script that was glossed over.

I'm listening to the Star Wars Radio drama as well (Christmas Present), and it's an interesting take on the movie. However, I can't help but feel that it has some large issues. There is a rule in screenwriting that states that you should always start the scene as late as possible and end it as soon as possible, and it is remarkable how much faster the movie flows. Granted, they were trying to make the radio drama more of an episodic story, but so much that is added seems to have little point.

Take for example the scene where Luke and Obi-wan inspect the blasted Sandcrawler. In the original movie, the scene starts after they have discovered it, whereas in the drama, we travel with them on their trip to Anchorhead and have the scene described to us in a more drawn out fashion.

It just makes you appreciate how much information is packed into the visual channel of Star Wars, that they need so much more time to explain it all.

CP3S said:

My favorite stuff by Tolkien are his children's stories. I love Roverandom, The Father Christmas Letters, and stuff like Leaf by Niggle and Father Giles of Ham. It is a shame the man wasn't a published children's author during his day, I feel like he really excelled at it, but of course, it wasn't really his thing and just fun stories he wrote for his own children. I am sure he would have much rather been well known for his academic works and for his Middle Earth stories.

 

I've never read any of this, in fact I haven't even heard of it except for Father Giles of Ham. More for my reading list!

We just finished watching Season 1, but season 2 won't be available from Netflix until February.

So how closely does the show cleave to the books?

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

NeverarGreat said:

... the implication is that the more midichlorians a person has, the more power they have with the Force,

...and...

Vader says "the Force is with _", a practically meaningless statement considering that according to the PT, the number of midichlorians in a person's blood determines how strong they are in the Force.

Correlation doesn't prove causality.  In TPM that midichlorians were a way of measuring the force in someone, not because they cause it, but because they happen to respond to it.  It's like seeing if someone has HIV by measuring their white blood cell count -- the white blood cells aren't HIV, and they don't cause it, but they respond to it and thus can be used to measure it.

It was a stupid, stupid idea that took an age-old spiritual idea, and made it scientific and cold.  Even LFL must have realized this because they didn't mention them in prequels 2 and 3.

QUI-GON : Midi-chlorians are a microcopic lifeform that reside within all living cells and communicates with the Force.
ANAKIN : They live inside of me?
QUI-GON : In your cells. We are symbionts with the midi-chlorians.
ANAKIN : Symbionts?
QUI-GON : Life forms living together for mutual advantage. Without the
midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force. They continually speak to you, telling you the will of the Force.

BEN: Well, the Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy
field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us.
It binds the galaxy together.

There are two important points in these statements.

1. The Force is created by all living things (organisms).

2. Midichlorians are life forms (that they are described as microscopic entities that can be scientifically measured implies that they are definite organisms).

According to the first two statements, Midichlorians are described as organisms, and thus create the Force.

They may not be the only organisms to create the Force, but they definitely contribute. So Midichlorians definitely cause the Force.

By the way, if Midichlorians are life forms, and life couldn't exist without them, how did they arise? Are they the fundamental unit of Life, from which all life is built? But if that's the case, wouldn't every cell be made entirely of Midichlorians? Or perhaps other forms of life were able to grow after Midichlorians arose, by operating  symbiotically with them. However, if Midichlorians were the first form of life, they would be originators of the Force, as the Force is created by all living things. Thus they would have created the Force, and would communicate the will of the Force, or the will of themselves, to other life forms. Consequently, the will of the Force is the will of a microscopic life form within all cells.

Oh wait, I forgot about the other reference to the Midichlorians:

Darth Plagueis was a Dark Lord of the Sith, so powerful and so wise he could use the Force to influence the midi-chlorians to create life...

But...but...they would have to do that anyway, right? ...and what does that even mean...and...?!!!*^#

none said:

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/mark-hamill-at-the-sydney-opera-house-20121121-29q7p.html

Mark Hamill explains the story of Star Wars

Once upon a time in a galaxy.....no-one knew what Star Wars was. Mark Hamill, who played Luke Skywalker, tries to explain it in an interview at Sydney Opera House, which is celebrating its 40th anniversary. Footage courtesy: The Opera House Project.

 

It was filmed not long after the movie was released in 1977.

Interesting take on the later films.

The Empire Strikes Back should have been "From Alderaan With Love." It would have been epic. And we would all be referring to it as FAWL.

generalfrevious said:

TheBoost said:

generalfrevious said:

I don't think Lucas cared about the little details anyway. Even the best SW movies were cynical cash grabs from the beginning. The more Lucas was paying attention to the merchandising, the more problems the movie had.

Really? Really??

Since the first Star Wars was a huge risk for the studio, and ESB was a huge risk with Lucas's own money, can't we, even at our most fan-hatred filled, call them sincere cash grabs?

And is it possible that when not caring about the relative speed of hyperdrive, Lucas just figured the FANS didn't give a damn and only cared about the story, not "this won't effect the bottom line."

What about Jedi? It was the lynchpin of the whole franchise, and since it falls short of perfect, the OT was already ruined. Maybe when he made the first star wars he might have cared about the story. But remember, he just wanted to remake Flash Gordon in the first place, and ANH strongly resembled any of the later prequels until it was saved in editing.

I for one have never seen the preliminary version of Star Wars, but I highly doubt that it "strongly resembled" the prequels. And to say that just because Jedi wasn't perfect means that the entire trilogy was ruined makes very little sense. Is Nolan's Batman trilogy ruined because Rises didn't live up to the first two?

SilverWook said:

It's said on screen the Falcon is in the Anoat system when Han mentions Lando.

But how did the Falcon get from the Hoth system to the Anoat system without a hyperdrive?

I'm guessing that nobody making the movie noticed this peculiarity, but it could just as well be that they were talking about two different uses of the word system at that point, star systems and planetary systems. If the 6th planet of the Hoth star system was where the rebel base was located, couldn't the Anoat planetary system be in the asteroid field, or directly beyond the it?

Picture Hoth as being where Mars is in our solar system. The Falcon could fly through the asteroid field, then find itself in the orbit of Jupiter, aka the Anoat system. Bespin would be another gas giant, aka Saturn. Since the distance between Mars and Saturn is about 8 AU, it would only take the Falcon 24 hours to travel there, traveling at only 5% the speed of light. Allowing for the high probability that the planets wouldn't be directly aligned, the trip from the orbit of Jupiter to the planet Saturn could take many weeks. However, this long voyage is likely based on how long Luke was expected to have trained with Yoda while this was happening.

If we take the Anoat and Bespin systems to be different star systems, however, they would likely be many light years away, which would take years to reach, even traveling at a high percentage of the speed of light.

This was probably just a mistake on the part of those making the movie, but in this way it could work.

DuracellEnergizer said:

 

NeverarGreat said:

Vader routinely says "The Force is with _", a practically meaningless statement considering that according to the PT, the Force is simply a certain concentration of organisms in a person's blood.

When Qui-Gon commented on the midi-chlorians, he said this

Without the midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force. They continually speak to us, telling us the will of the Force.

Notice that he says that without midi-chlorians, life would not exist and there would be no knowledge of the Force, not that the Force itself wouldn't exist. It clearly makes the case that the midi-chlorians are meant to be conduits to the Force, not the source of it.

I'm not saying midi-chlorians are a good idea - I have my own reasons for disliking them - but it's not a good idea to use a flawed argument to make a case against them.

 

By stating that life could not exist without the midichlorians, Qui-gon is implying that the Force is one of life itself, animating matter in the universe. While I don't particularly have a problem with this idea, the implication is that the more midichlorians a person has, the more power they have with the Force, regardless of the "will" of the Force. For all intents and purposes in the Star Wars movies, the will of the Force is nil after the number of midichlorians in a person's blood has been determined.

I should have stated the inconsistency as:

Vader says "the Force is with _", a practically meaningless statement considering that according to the PT, the number of midichlorians in a person's blood determines how strong they are in the Force.

The inconsistency in my opinion is that Vader viewed the Force like a spiritual gift or blessing, something that could imparted or revoked at any moment. This is why Obi-wan states twice to Luke that the Force will be with him always. The PT does away with this aspect of the Force in my interpretation.

I'd say that the largest problem with the OT from a technical plot point of view is the idea that the Millennium Falcon, without hyperdrive, manages to locate and fly to Lando's mining operation.

Think about this for a minute.

The only way that a ship without a hyperdrive would be able to get to another planet would be if that planet was in the same star system as it was. Accordingly, Bespin must be a planet in the Hoth system. However, this raises some questions. If the Hoth system was devoid of habitation, why didn't the rebels know about this operation, including Han and Leia? Furthermore, how convenient is it that this mining colony, located in the rebel's backyard, is home to Lando Calrissian, a friend to captain Solo and previous owner of the Falcon? The chances against that happening are literally astronomical.

Speaking of highly convenient occurrences, Yoda's death seems to require more explanation than is given in Jedi. As it is, he dies five minutes after Luke arrives on Dagobah, a stunning coincidence. It could be that it was his destiny to train Luke, and seeing as his training was complete, there was nothing to prolong his life. Or Luke's training took such a toll that he hung on long enough to tell Luke about his sister, then croaked. It could be that one of these hypotheses could be tastefully mentioned in the sequel trilogy as part of a character's greater understanding of the Force, but I'm not holding my breath.

On the subject of sisters, obviously Leia as Luke's sister was a misstep.

Another, less important issue concerns the Falcon's speed. In Star Wars, Han states that the Falcon is very fast, that she can make .5 past light speed. This seems to be a measure of her hyperdrive capabilities. Later, Lando also boasts that she's the fastest ship in the galaxy. However, in Jedi, Han says to Lando that the Falcon is the fastest ship in the fleet, and that would presumably help him in the battle over Endor. This implies that the Falcon is extremely fast at sublight travel as well, despite not being able to outrun a Star Destroyer at sublight speed. This isn't necessarily a problem, as the Falcon could be the fastest ship in the galaxy in hyperspace, while only being the fastest ship in the rebel fleet at sublight speed. Again, not as much a problem as it is a confusing technical distinction.

All of these problems except for the first aren't really problems in my book. The OT doesn't have all that many as far as I can tell.

greenpenguino said:

 

Yeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhh...

 

Good movie, innit?

The movie is a stunning expose of human misery, the perfect remedy for a lingering malaise.

It is also a remarkably obscure thing to reference.

Bingowings said:

Is this from Withnail and I?

Where to begin?

Let's start with the temporal problems:

In the OT, it is implied that Leia knew her mother for several years before her death, whereas in the PT Padme dies moments after she was born.

The Old Republic existed for over one thousand generations in the OT, whereas in the PT it existed for only a thousand years.

Owen, Beru, Anakin, and Obi-wan age forty years in the twenty years between trilogies.

Character Problems:

It is implied that Obi-wan trained Anakin because of hubris (and in other versions of Jedi it confirms this), and not merely to fulfill a promise to his dying master (who, by the way, was never mentioned in the OT).

Obi-wan and Yoda simply run away at the end of Episode 3, even though they were prepared to kill both Anakin and the Emperor directly prior to this. They even meet up after their injury-less defeats, and they never consider returning together to destroy the Emperor while Anakin is incapacitated. Instead, they wait for twenty years for Luke to come of age (which actually would be considered too old to begin Jedi training anyway), and never even consider training Leia. Obi-wan even considers Luke their "only hope", even though the PT confirmed the existence of female Jedi, making Leia a perfectly acceptable candidate for becoming a Jedi. Add to all of this the fact that it is never mentioned that Anakin's children would be "chosen ones" in the style of their father (whatever that means), thus making their waiting pointless, as they should just finish the job themselves.

Anakin is described as the best starpilot in the galaxy in the OT, but no mention is ever made of this in the PT.

Technical Problems:

In the PT we see that a tracking device is a small, handheld device which can be hidden practically anywhere on a ship in order to track it, which makes Han's certainty that they are not being tracked in the OT rather perplexing. Before this I had assumed that a homing beacon would be a large device like the scanner suite that was hauled on-board the Falcon.

The chances of Chewie being familiar with Yoda from the PT and then meeting Obi-wan and company twenty years later strain credulity and shrink the universe immensely.

Anakin building C-3PO. In fact, having R2 and C-3PO in both trilogies is far too convenient.

Vader routinely says "The Force is with _", a practically meaningless statement considering that according to the PT, the Force is simply a certain concentration of organisms in a person's blood.

Force lightning can be blocked by a lightsaber in the PT, drawing undue attention to the fact that Luke threw it away in the OT, and thus exposing himself to this attack.

Thematic/Miscellaneous Problems:

The technology of the PT is much more advanced than in the OT.

Tatooine seems to be the center of the Star Wars universe, being in every Star Wars movie except one.

The Sith are focused on in the PT, whereas they are never mentioned in the OT. Conversely, destiny is focused on in the OT, where it is almost never mentioned in the PT.

When watched in numerical order, the three big reveals of the OT (Yoda, Anakin, and Leia) are ruined in the PT.

And perhaps the biggest problem of all: The central problem of the OT is that Luke cannot kill his father, whom he knows was a good man. From the PT, we know that Anakin murdered a tribe of Sandpeople and all the younglings in the Jedi temple, for no other reasons than 1: he was angry and 2: he was following orders in order to save his wife, whom he kills anyway. From this I can't call Anakin a good man. I would have no qualms with killing someone who did such evil acts, and thus if Luke knew the truth as the audience does, he probably wouldn't either. Therefore according to what the audience knows, the PT destroys the central conflict of the OT.

Well, the world was about to end, see, and, well, it made sense at the time...

A: The Portuguese Air Force (Força Aérea Portuguesa), the Peruvian Air Force (Fuerza Aérea del Peru), and the People's Armed Forces (Forces Armées Populaires).

Q: Why is it important to always chew your food?

Wait, but that was a surprise to even LOTR fans. He doesn't survive in the books, Jackson and Co brought him back for the movies.

I guess that wasn't very clear. I meant that it would be more of a surprise for everyone when he showed up at the end, instead of revealing him before the halfway point like they did.

It is called foreshadowing. And it is for much more than connecting the two trilogies together. In one of the next two films the Necromancer will play a much greater role. What you are saying is pretty much like saying having the character of Anakin Skywalker in the prequels is a pointless reference for the sake of linking the two SW trilogies together. They are very closely connected stories and one leads right into the other.

I don't think you seem to realize that there are two stories being told in these films. It isn't just the tale of the dwarves on their quest to retrieve their gold, which is really just a short little children's story that could easily be fit into a single film. You said anything that wasn't part of Bilbo's story should have been cut, well that is all the book is. But these movies are also the story of Sauron's rise back to power and Gandalf's detective work of piecing together the puzzle of Sauron's plans, which eventually leads to the importance of the forming of the fellowship and the destruction of the ring. These films are basically an adaption of The Hobbit and major parts of The Lord of the Rings: Appendices A and B, merged together and playing out in chronological order.

Oh, I know what PJ is trying to do; however, after seeing the first installment, I just don't think that it's working. Maybe I'll eat my words after seeing the next two.

It is clear you are one of the casual fans you mentioned and you aren't familiar with the books. I think you should just sit back and see how things pan out before getting too worked up. I think what's to come is going to be a lot of fun. I look forward to the stuff about the Necromancer far more than the rest of The Hobbit story, which really is quite anticlimactic. To me the peak of excitement in The Hobbit has always been the goblins in Misty Mountains and Bilbo finding the ring.

Them's fightin' words. Granted, my Tolkien shelf is missing the Silmarillion, but that's only because I'm lending it to a friend. Which of the two versions of the Hobbit on my shelf am I not familiar with? Or perhaps it's The Lord of the Rings, Unfinished Tales, or The Children of Hurin that I'm rusty on?

I jest.

Tolkien always used the Eagles as his last minute jump in and save the day thing. A very obvious and blatant deux ex machina. I feel they have always been more than a bit of a cop out. There is really no deep "character" and "philosophy". They aren't confusing, they are just lame.

I agree with that, partially. I'm talking about those casual viewers that think that Gandalf summons them with his magic, and they disappear afterwards, or other such confusion. They don't talk in the movies, they just have Gandalf find a moth and whisper to it for some reason, as if that's enough time for the moth to find the eagles and for them to come like trained animals in search of a reward. In the Hobbit, it is established that the Lord of the Eagles was helped by Gandalf when the wizard removed an arrow from him, and the eagles helped Gandalf and company partly in payment of this debt, and partly because they don't like the goblins either. They would not, however, go near any towns of men, for the men would shoot arrows at them. The ancient race of Eagles are described as "proud and strong and noble-hearted", so they clearly have some character. I just think that showing this would clear up the misunderstandings with casual viewers, and would be an addition to the movie which wasn't made up by PJ. But yes, their continual aid at convenient moments is rather lame. 

Spoilers follow.

Eh, I thought the dwarves were all right. Though it seemed strange that I didn't learn who practically any of them were called, even after almost three hours, and I've read all the books! You'd think that PJ would have included more character bits to differentiate the dwarves.

I did not like much of the Azog bits, mostly because it felt like extra padding, but it also made most of the movie seem like one long chase scene, so there was never a break in the tension, even at Rivendell. It ended up being tiring. Also, it annoyed me that Weathertop was pointlessly shoehorned into this movie, as if we didn't see enough familiar scenery. If I was to do a fanedit, I'd take out all scenes of Azog except for the final one, only because you couldn't really excise that without damaging the story. That way, we would hear about the Azog vs. Thorin relationship, and later it would be a surprise even to LOTR fans that he had survived.

Also a problem with Azog: Having a creepy robot hand. Oh, we're done with that.

I liked the character of Radagast, despite being a bit too cutesy, but there was little reason to have him in the movie. Same with Sauruman, and Galadriel (apparently she can teleport?!) and the stone throwing giants. In fact, any time that the story wasn't solely about Bilbo, they should have cut it. There is something that has been called the Off-Screen-Movie, which is all of the implied events that happen while the actual scenes of the movie are playing, and these implied scenes can make a movie seem more dense, more fast paced, or more dramatic. In the Hobbit, everything about the story is shown onscreen, and this to me makes it seem like there is less story, ironically.

Here's an example. We see three characters that we have just met (Saruman, Elrond, and Galadriel) discuss with Gandalf at length about some place we haven't been (Dol-Guldur) and a character we know almost nothing about (the necromancer). Through this dialogue, we get no impression about what effect it will have on Bilbo, the dwarves, or their quest to go to Erebor. In their discussion, a sword from a ghost that we haven't met yet is revealed, and used to make a subtle argument about the technical nature of magic in Middle Earth, something that we don't know much about. This scene must be absolutely bizarre for a newcomer, and for someone who has seen the LOTR movies, it is pointless collection of references for the sake of linking the two narratives together.

All of this, and they still don't explain the character and philosophy of the eagles, which have probably caused more casual fan confusion than any other element of the movies.

I think that the Jedi Code, as it is understood from the OT, is unworkable in the long run. "A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack." That has been demonstrably shown not to have worked out for Luke when he faced the Emperor. It is kind of like King Arthur's Grail quest; all of his best knights achieve the grail and are taken up to heaven, while his worst knights remain on Earth. Any Jedi Order would probably have the same fate.

I agree that for the Jedi path to work, it would need to change. Just not in the way that Jeni intends.

McFlabbergasty said:

NeverarGreat said:

I like that Han, Chewie, and the droids all died. Their character arcs were pretty well over anyway.

Chewie's.....arc?

DOES

NOT

COMPUTE 

Well, I guess just Han. Derpy derp.

Anchorhead said:

NeverarGreat said:

I am simply bewildered that so many people say that Zahn understands Star Wars better than Lucas. Zahn never tells us anything new about the Force, doesn't really force any of the primary cast to change

Thrawn and Mara Jade seemed to be the only characters that he cared about

I suppose it's all about what a person wants from a novel and what you consider understanding Star Wars. If it's strictly the magic of the journey from 1977, I feel like Zahn understands it much better than Lucas.  If it's Tolkienesque mythology - that's all Lucas.

I wanted something more than the tired rehash of Jedi v Sith.  I didn't find that stuff even remotely interesting in the one prequel I saw, so I certainly didn't want to read any novels about it.  I wouldn't have bothered.

Correct on Zahn not delving into, or explaining, the Force.  I loved it's mystery in 1977, so I enjoy its continued mystical properties in the Zahn novels.  I'd much rather have it be an unknown magical property that only some people can feel - instead of Lucas' heavy-handed over explanation of how it can simply be measured with a Lady Gillette and then discussed ad nauseum in some chamber of elders.

Also correct on Mara and Thrawn being the focus of several of his novels.  He invented those characters, so it stands to reason he'd write about them more often.

Regarding character development;  I'd agree that Han & Leia go through very little of it in his novels.  However, they don't figure into his stories much beyond vehicle, so they don't need to have lengthy novels about personal growth. That, by the way, is fine with me because I don't find either character to be very interesting.  Luke is a continuation of, and maturing of, the character he was in Return.  I think his character growth is realistic.

On a related note;  To me, Zahn understands and handles Lando far better than Lucas.  The novels where he figures into the story are some of the best of Zahn's work.

Mara receives the bulk of the growth through the years.  We see her from the time she's 18 to around the age of forty and her character is wildly different as she grows and matures through the years. I enjoy her stories more than any of the others.  I particularly like her depth when she's older.

If you dig the Sith\Jedi arc, there appears to be shelf after shelf of it in the book stores.  Compared to what I seek out in EU, it's much more popular.  It's not what I'd prefer, but I expect the Disney films to go in that direction.

 

I don't care for Jedi vs Sith either. Personally I don't consider the idea of the Sith to even be canon, even if it was mentioned in the novelization. However, each of the original movies showed a different aspect of the Force, which is what made it so interesting. The idea of battle meditation was interesting, but it also felt like a retcon of a perfectly cinematic situation in order to make it satisfying from a tactical standpoint.

On the subject of the original characters, if they weren't going to change, why have them in the story at all? I like the military aspect of Zahn's books, and if he did a sequel trilogy focused purely on the battles with his created characters, then I think it would be a much more interesting story. But people need to see our heroes plastered on the covers of EU books for them to be sold.

Tobar said:

There is nothing about this photo I don't love:

So what is this supposed to be? It looks like there are eight legs on it, each too thin to support the massive feet. Unless of course those are just clamps to make sure someone doesn't walk off with it. Somebody should make an animation of this thing in motion. Whether walking or flying, it would probably look ridiculous.